McCoy v. Rivera’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 2014
8 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on 241 Mo. App. 1048 - State Ex Rel. White v. Swink · State Ex Rel. Dubinsky v. Weinstein · State Ex Rel. Laws v. Higgins · State Ex Rel. Rashid v. Drumm · State Ex Rel. Kassen v. Carver
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although the child lived with McCoy and Bartell after 1988, they had no previously existing legal right to the child’s custody. No court appointed them as legal guardians, and custody had not been adjudicated before the circuit court entered its order in January 1993. We find no basis which would have entitled McCoy and Bartell to bring a habeas action. We decline their invitation to treat this matter as one or any other type of action without establishing that they were entitled to bring their action and that the court had jurisdiction. Before this action, no court had entered a custody order. Although the child has lived with McCoy and Bartell since 1988, they had no legal right, without a court order, to retain custody after Rivera was released from prison.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. White v. White“Habeas corpus is appropriate only in cases where a party is claiming that a person is being illegally or wrongfully restrained. The law, however, does not authorize an individual who has no previously existing legal right to custody of the child to bring an action in habeas corpus for custody. The person bringing an action in habeas corpus must stand in the position of a parent, guardian or someone entitled to custody because of some court order or judgment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. White v. White
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.